摘要
《民法典》通过不同的条款确立了姓名与特定名称中财产利益的保护规则,对于特定名称财产利益的保护设定了“知名度”和“公众混淆”要件,但对于姓名财产利益的保护却没有这样的前提,这不但未充分吸收已有司法实践经验,也未充分吸收《反不正当竞争法》的已有规定。经过登记的姓名与自然人之间不存在当然对应关系,知名度是认定一个姓名在公众中是否具有可识别性的关键考察因素,知名度的高低体现了姓名商业价值的高低,是侵权损害赔偿数额的考量因素。损害姓名与特定名称财产利益的后果不仅限于导致公众混淆,同时还包括攀附或者利用名人的声誉等情形。立法应该为姓名与特定名称的财产利益的保护设置统一的规则,在现有规则的解释上则应该尽量缩小姓名与特定名称的财产利益保护前提上的差异。
The Chinese Civil Code establishes rules for the protection of property interests in names and specific cognomens through various articles.It sets"famousness"and"confusion of public"as the requirements for protecting property interests in specific cognomens,but not for names'protection.Such an arrangement not only does not fully absorb the existing judicial practice experience,but also does not fully absorb the related provisions of the Chinese Anti-Unfair Competition Law.Even for a legally registered name,it's not necessary to have a correspondence with a specific natural person.The existence of famousness is a key factor for determining whether a name is identifiable for a specific person in the public.The level of famousness reflects the commercial value of a name,so it is also a consideration for the amount of damages.The consequences of damaging the property interests of a name or a particular cognomens are not limited to causing confusion of public,but may also include clinging to or taking advantage of the reputation of celebrities.Legislation should set uniform rules for protecting property interests in names and specific cognomens.In practice,when interpretating the existing rules,the difference in the protection of property interests between names and specific cognomens should be minimized.
作者
张伟君
庄雨晴
Zhang Weijun;Zhuang Yuqing
出处
《知识产权》
CSSCI
北大核心
2023年第1期69-86,共18页
Intellectual Property
基金
国家社会科学基金重大项目“网络化开放创新范式下企业知识产权市场化保护与价值转化机制研究”(项目批准号:21&ZD142)。
关键词
民法典
人格权
姓名权
公开权
商品化权
Chinese Civil Code
right of personality
right to name
right of publicity
merchandising right
